On Sat, Oct 17, 2009 at 6:26 AM, Robert Bradshaw
<[email protected]> wrote:
> On Oct 17, 2009, at 1:02 AM, Stefan Behnel wrote:
>>
>> Personally, I would prefer either 1) or 3), the latter likely being
>> more
>> convenient but potentially introducing new pitfalls elsewhere (to be
>> seen).
>>
>> Comments?
>
> I'm for (2) or (3), with a preference for (2). Option (1) will break
> code (which I'm strongly against) and (3) seems prone to pitfalls as
> you mention.
>

Yes, I also prefer (2). Anyway, I'm not going to implement it ;-) ...

Robert, I also hate to break code. But I also hate to ask developer's
to spend its time on supporting features related to ambiguities...
IMHO, this is a case where "In the face of ambiguity, refuse the
temptation to guess." applies.

So I would say that (1) is out for backward compatibility reasons,
then choose from (2) or (3) the easiest one to implement, and emit
warnings about using unprefixed 1-string literals in char contexts.
Hopefully, the warnings will be annoying enough to "force" users to
update their code. Then I would not care too much about the possible
pitfalls of (3), in case of (3) being the way to follow because it is
the easiest to implement.


-- 
Lisandro Dalcín
---------------
Centro Internacional de Métodos Computacionales en Ingeniería (CIMEC)
Instituto de Desarrollo Tecnológico para la Industria Química (INTEC)
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET)
PTLC - Güemes 3450, (3000) Santa Fe, Argentina
Tel/Fax: +54-(0)342-451.1594
_______________________________________________
Cython-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev

Reply via email to